Ford MEL engines????

#25 Mr. Kultulz
" In 1958, FOMOCO introduced three new engine series, the FE (332-352-361), the MEL (383-410-430-and later 462) and the SUPER DUTY HT gasoline engines (401-477-534). "

I don't want to get too far off track here, but were the Super Duty HT engines the forerunner to the 4 ring FT style FE engine found in HD truck lines and industrial applications?

And just out of my curiosity; How interchangeable are entire MEL engine assy's to FE's ?
Would flywheels and bellhousing patterns be similar to the FE or the older Y ?

Inquiring mind here........... Tom S. in Tn.

 

That's a good question, because if it shared the same bellhousing and flywheel as the FE it would make it that much easier to get a performance transmission (or any transmission) for the MEL. Now I want to know!

 

After answering Tom's question I have another, and this seems to be the place for it. Considering the MEL has the same bore spacing as a 460, taller deck height than a 460, and a bore only .020" over the 460 and a stroke only .020" under a 460's, could an MEL fit a 4.5" or even 4.75" crank like a 460? That 4.75" crank and .060" over for a 4.44" bore would produce a 588 CI beast and nobody would be the wiser. The same bore and the 4.5" crank would still produce a hefty 557 CI's of displacement, and that would make plenty of torque to move that big Lincoln!

 

Is there anyone that does make or has blower manifolds such as Hampton or Dyers, etc. for a MEL? Herb.

 

Blower manifolds were made. I think Weiand was the only one who made them. Beep can tell ya for sure I bet. I've got a Weiand 8x2 on a lincoln motor now and would like to have another stroker motor but I'm not smart enough to build it. I'd replace my hemi in the shoebox if I could do it. There are some aftermarket aluminum valve covers being built FINALLY by Moon and by a fellow in california that I'm not sure I'm supposed to mention by name (?) but they were available through HOTRODCHASSIS and Cycle on the HAMB last I knew along with his after market 8x2 aluminum intake. I was going to have some parts cast but quit when I found out these were in the works years ago.

 

The MELs were also used as marine engines.
Chris-Craft for one, and I think also Interceptor
Marine and a few others also, used the 430 as
the basis for numerous marine conversions.
I'm not sure about others, but Chris-Craft
called their marine version of the 430 MEL a
"431" rather than a "430". Here's some pics
of a "Chris-Craft 431", nee "430 Lincoln".

Mart3406
=====================

 

yeah, old boatyards are actually one of the best places to find MEL speed parts these days. Seems most of the 6x2 setups and cool dizzys, etc...come from old speed boats with MEL's.

 

The early '58-'60 MEL has the same bellhousing pattern as the FE; any FE manual bell or auto trans will fit these MEL blocks. This is one reason why the '58-'60 MEL 430s are the most sought; also, as someone mentioned earlier, the heads/intakes are considered better, because they weren't designed with hood clearance in mind. The '61-up Lincolns have a very low hood position in relation to the engine, and things had to be moved around to make it all work.

The '61-'65 MELs use a "modified" FE pattern, with a relocated starter. A normal FE bell/trans will not fit it, nor is it easily modified to fit. There have been rumors of this being done...but I've never personally seen it happen, nor have I ever seen any reliable details of the modification. The MEL starter is physically lower on these blocks, and you would either have to remove part of the block, or extensively alter the bellhousing. Bendtsen makes an adapter to mate these to Chevrolet-pattern transmissions or the FoMoCo AOD, but it is very expensive and I don't know the details.

As a side note, the '61 Lincoln bellhousing is unique, in case someone reads this and is considering some sort of swap/replacement of either engine or transmission.

The '66-'67 MEL 462 uses a weird "trapezoid" pattern , with the introduction of the C6. These blocks may or may not have the "modified" FE pattern on the block as well. Bendtsen lists an adapter for the Chevrolet/AOD transmissions for these late MELs as well; again, very expensive.

In terms of making a stroker MEL, anything's possible....but you could build a 557 ci 460-based engine that would make more power, for 1/2 the cost....possibly less. (shrugs) If I'm spending that kind of money, I'd better see a great deal of results.

In answer to Tom S.' question about the Super Duty engines, no, they aren't directly related to the FT engines, which were more oriented towards medium duty trucks/industrial apps. Some FTs were used in what Ford considered "HD" trucks as well, especially later on. The SD engines are sort of a weird overgrown MEL, in a way; they weigh around 1000 pounds and are in the same class as the big GMC and International V8 gas engines....a reasonable amount of torque for what they are, but you'll never pass a gas station, and even the '60s diesel generation will surpass them in every way. I used to have a ton of pictures of one, but that computer is no more.

 

Well I'm very familiar with 429/460-based 557 strokers, which is where I got the idea, although this time I was thinking more along the lines of a unique engine. Dropping a 557 stroker in a car is sure to make it move but it's nothing new. Not to mention I'd really like to see if an MEL will outpower a 385 series with a similar build, just because of the unique combustion chamber and all the swirl it induces. No doubt about it the 385 series is cheaper, and I already have two at my disposal not yet being used, but I think a 557 MEL would be twice as cool as a 557 385 series, especially in the right car. But you do have a perfectly valid point. I'd just like to see it done.

 

Best engine ever !got one in a model a
I have 8 pot intakes & valve and timing covers available.

 

ooh! didn't know about the timing covers! Is Bestrada still making the bronze gears too?

 

Thank you very kindly Homespun. Wish I could have known back then what I'm learning now about Fords and Hot Rod Linc's.
I've worked on lots of FT's, but recall only seeing one or two SD engines over the years and always wondered about their origin. Always had Holley's with governors. Wish you still had pix. Tom S.

 

Check out the Modified Mustangs and Fords Magazine link.
http://www.mustangandfords.com/index.html
They have run a couple of articles on the buildup of the 460 (385) series) big block engine in the past few months. Part I in the May issue and Part II in the June issue. Part III will be out in July. Part I is a dyno run in basically stock form from a junkyard find that has a 60 over re-bore. Part II is with some cam, intake & carb changes and some cleaned up heads. Part III will be about a some more serious modifications. Check out the earlier related articles on their website about a Monster Mash build of a 385 series into a T-Rex, 598 cu in, 800hp, 1320 ft Monster Motor. The article lists all the parts used and the step by step build. A real axle twister!
Enjoy,
KCBLUEOVAL

 

I think Estrada is dead or in prison.. No one can reach him anymore. Wish I could though.

 

Big Block Fords. Love em all, but madly in love with the MEL. Take a stock 430 crank, off set grind the crank to fit early Pony rods, use early pony MT AL rods with 392 chrysler wrist pins and MT Al pistons, Bham,,508 Ci's with no ver bore. Fill the block with hard block and bore it 250 over, Double Bam...588 Ci's. That's the way we did it back in 1960 anyway. Talk about torques?

 

History Lesson: 1959 NHRA Nationals in Detroit.
A Gas dragster class winner: Tets Ishimura (sp?) won the class with a Lincoln
A Sports Car: Lincoln power won the class
Top Eliminator: Rodney SIng lIncoln power
A Gas SC: Runner up was Lincoln powered

Cool huh

 

Oh my at the Ford goodness in this thread.

My nickname is Mel...so I always wanted a Ford truck with a MEL engine so the vanity plate could read [MEL X2].

I love my 352FE and love the old Ford engines that aren't the cookie cutter 302/351.

 

Yes,and every winner of the 50 other classes was a SBC

You talk of these MEL engines making globs of torque.Compared to what? Do they actually make more torque than a similar cubic inch Chevy,Pontiac,Mopar etc stock or modified the same?

 

The SD Series was meant for Heavy Truck only (gasoline was what then?). This series was replaced mainly by diesel. The FT was the replacement for the LINC Y-BLOCK 302/332 HD Truck and the FORD Y-BLOCK 272/292 HD series.

As mentioned, the 58/60 MEL engine had the FE bell pattern and is easily converted to FE drive train. The 58 block had front mount provision on the skirts and 59 saw a skirt mount redesign similar to early FE.

In 1961, the block saw many design changes, one being the bell pattern. It was a modified FE that allowed the engine to be set into the LINC unibody. The only bell offered accepted the LX. 1966 saw another redesign whereas the bell pattern was modified to accept the new LINC SPECIFIC C6. The LINC C6 main case was different from the corporate C6 case in that it had to clear the HVAC box on the firewall. The 462 also retained the previous 430 modified FE pattern. If you notice, the 460 also was dual pattern, LINC SPECIFIC C6 and Corporate C6 until 1979 redesign.

All of this (well, most anyways) is recorded @ THE MEL ENGINE FAMILY Message Board. You will also read early misconceptions and corrections (it was a learning exercise bringing all of the facts together as very few knew anything about them say five years ago).

Someone asked about FE/MEL interchangeability-

Oil Pump and valve train mostly. Both are very closely engineered alike except for the combustion chamber design.

SLOVER PORTING makes adapter plates for 385 Series intakes and also has recast the Aluminum MERC SUPER MARAUDER 3 X 2 rocker covers. I also think they offer a set that is plain and is close to the CAL CUSTOM covers of the day.

Shown In The Thumbnail is a 534SD Takeout-

 

<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width: 100%;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr style=""><td valign="top">
</td><td style="padding: 0.75pt 0.75pt 0.75pt 128.55pt;">
</td> <td style="padding: 0.75pt 0.75pt 0.75pt 128.55pt;" valign="top">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="504" height="617"> <tbody><tr style=""> <td style="padding: 0.75pt 0.75pt 0.75pt 128.55pt;">

...sheesh...

OK E-I-E-I-O...

You have dis-proven me again. The FE shafts will not work as they are just a little short...

(Funny...My old lady said the same thing last night)

My info was coming from individuals a few years ago on the other forum that had claimed to use FE shafts (who knows, they may have). I accepted this without further research. I have now corrected my data banks. I think the reasoning was the MEL shafts were not available new (although assemblies could be had reman).

Again, my ignorance is no excuse to call you on the subject.
_______________________________________

<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width: 100%;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr style=""><td valign="top">
</td><td style="padding: 0.75pt 0.75pt 0.75pt 128.55pt;">
</td></tr></tbody></table></td> </tr> </tbody></table>

 

hi got the early 430 engine and bellhousing , what do you use for flywheel ?

 

In reference to the MEL/FE rocker interchange, here are some notes from a past build. As they say, your mileage may vary.

1) For a mild MEL build, the stock pieces will work fine as long as they are in good shape.

2) The rockers are a tale in and of themselves. The FE & MEL rockers will physically interchange, regardless of the ratio (more on that in a bit). The stands and shafts are different, and NOT interchangable. MEL shafts are slightly longer and the MEL stands are shorter. Probably the best way to go about things is to have somebody like Rocker Arm Specialists http://www.rockerarms.com/ take your MEL shafts and recondition them. You can get aftermarket 2.24" FE iron or steel stands (Low Riser & std., IIRC) and have them machined down to the MEL height of 1.885". Original FE stands are notoriously weak for performance use and I imagine MELs are no better. Keep in mind there are four different FE rocker stands, so buy whatever is most appropriate...I believe that the common low-perf stands are all aluminum, which you don't want, but the LR (Low Riser) stand is similar, made in cast iron. Of course many of the cam companies offer better stands for the FE, too. It would also be possible to modify aftermarket FE roller rocker setups as well, possibly making new shafts, or using reconditioned MEL originals.

3) All MELs (as far as I know) have a stock rocker arm ratio of 1.76:1. However...early aftermarket MEL cams were ground for a 1.5:1 rocker, just like most or all other aftermarket cams, due to the cam grinding technology of that time, and the cam companies offered rocker sets to suit, which were required, or at least strongly suggested. Around '63, Isky (IIRC) developed the ability to grind lobe profiles that could work with higher ratio rockers, and for a while Isky offered "equivalent" cams for either ratio. By '65 most companies seem to have offered cams for only the 1.76 rockers. The bottom line is that the builder needs to figure out what exactly he/she is using, if it's a NOS cam, and pay very close attention to geometry, coil bind, retainer-to-guide clearance, and piston-to-valve clearance. It would be important with a hydraulic cam as well, although most hydraulics of that vintage would be pretty mild. If anyone can add to this, it would be most welcome- this is just a jumble of what I have found from personal experience, deduced from old cam catalogs, & gleaned from other MEL guys.

4) FE lifters- hydraulic, solid, & roller will all work in the MEL, but the lifter bore spacing is different (wider) in the MELs- so you may find that when using roller lifters, the link bars may not be long enough. Look at different brands & link types to see which ones may work better.

5) Pushrods and springs of course are going to be whatever size/length necessary.

 

Some of those old engine were pretty tough- I had a 10-wheel dump with the old "Lincoln Y-block" 332/ Allison automatic, and rebuilt it a couple times, probably had 10 different drivers in it, and couldn't hurt it. Very similar to a regular Y-block but bigger- also had a 2-gear driven cam, so the cam ran "backwards". Also have had 330MD, 361, and 391HD's and worked on 'em all, and a 534SD- as well as Binders with 345, 392, and a 549- another beastly old gasser. The 534 and 549 did like their gas if you pushed 'em hard, but would also show their tailgates to most of the average diesels of the day if you really let them eat- I saw a few guys wise off to folks, passing them with 220 or 250 Cummins and 6-71 238hp Screamers (running wide open) powered trucks, and laughing at them or shooting them the bird, and then get passed right back by those old gassers One of the guys had a '69 F-Super Duty with a 534, and had straight pipes with no mufflers that exited to the side right by the mudflaps- if you passed him, he'd split your eardrums when he passed you back
Funniest one I saw was one of the guys drove an old 50's Diamond-T with a Binder RD501 six in it, a pretty good torque monster (a lot of guys have swapped 501's into early pulling tractors) who always drove in fuel economy mode, and the truck was a bit of a rat that he had bought from a septic service contractor and still had their name on the doors, so you can imagine it's nickname All the young bucks would pass him and pick on him about it, he'd just grin. So he gets passed one day on "Howard Hill" by a kid in a new Mack with a Maxidyne in it, and gets the bird as he goes by- now this old wreck had one of those big cowcatcher/radiator guard bumpers on it that they like back east, so he kicks it a little, and butts up against the back of the Mack, and proceeds to push him up the hill for about a 1/4 mile- then backs off, pulls out and passes him- holy embarrassment, Batman- nobody gave him any "crap" about his "sh^!box" after that

 

Hey trucked up. You'r almost right, but not quite. The sbc was NOT the be all end all engine in 1959. Damn good, but no cigar yet. The Ford Y-blocks, Pony, Olds, Nailheads and even the Caddys, still ruled the roost in 1959. But as we all now know. LOL, that, in my opinion, that piece of shit sbc did come to rule. And still does.

Keep in mind that even the hemi, was not yet the king in the fuel classes. Close, but not yet king in 1959.

The MEL was a brand new engine family in 1958 that offered huge CI advantages very cheaply. It didn't last that long and was pure hell to keep them together at high rpm or heavy loads of nitro, but dammned if they didn't make tons of HP and torque.

 

New MEL shafts are available from FALCON-GLOBAL as well as new cams. I do not know their source and/or quality.

I spent a complete summer in a T-950 SD 534 20SPD open lake pipes @ the tanks. Between that and unmuffled F-MODELS over the years is the main reason I cannot hear... She wouldn't pull out of the dirt like a THERMODYNE but she was hell on the big road.

I have older E-MAILS saved from a couple of people that said they were using FE shafts. I guess I didn't add that needed grain of salt...

 

Actually, I know a guy who would probably make up some beefy shafts for an MEL if somebody wanted to pay for 'em, the beefed FE shafts are much thicker and stronger than the stockers- just have to make 'em a little longer and space the holes out a bit more

 

Just poking a little fun....MEL's have the flat combustion chamber ,I think it's called a Herron head.Similar to the 348 that came out at the same time.It's supposed to make better midrange torque.

 

#68;
" The SD engines are sort of a weird overgrown MEL, in a way; they weigh around 1000 pounds and are in the same class as the big GMC and International V8 gas engines....a reasonable amount of torque for what they are, but you'll never pass a gas station, and even the '60s diesel generation will surpass them in every way. "

I'm getting it now. The 401/534 SD engines originated out of the MEL program, specifically for around class 5 or 6 and heavier gas Ford truck.
If I'm not mistaken yet again, these engines carried on up into later years until the oil embargo and diesel became the hi torq fuel of choice and especially for off road app's.
I never realized they originated from the MEL line way back when. Is this correct?

#79;
" The FT was the replacement for the LINC Y-BLOCK 302/332 HD Truck and the FORD Y-BLOCK 272/292 HD series. "

Was the Linc Y Block 302/332 HD a pre-1958 model? What year were those dropped? (just an educated guess is sufficient).

One more tid bit for you MEL fellows. I've just got to take time to ask and try to get this all straight.
I know the V-12 was the Linc flathead version back in the 40's, but what was the Linc engine after the V-12 and prior the new 1958 series of engines? A Y-Block of some sort??

I never looked twice at a MEL because I never knew absolutely anything about them, so thanx to all for sharing your knowledge.
We have completely stolen someones discussion here. Who started this, sorry......
Tom S. in Tn.

 

No. The SD was independent of the MEL Division (FORD had a HT Division). I suppose engineering used the combustion chamber design in both series.

The LINC power plant after their dedicated flat head was the LINC Y-BLOCK Series.

The 302/332 was a derivative of the LINC Y-BLOCK. The engine design was also used for medium truck at its inception along with powering the LINC.

The 302/332 was last used in 63 I believe as the new FT came along in 64 (As I remember).

 

Here You Go-

-LINCOLN FLATHEAD-

-LINCOLN Y-BLOCK-

-MEL ENGINE FAMILY-