Quote from: 1966sevenlitre on June 07, 2016, 06:12:31 PM

Quote from: JamesonRacing on June 06, 2016, 10:47:47 AM

I have those covers on my convertible Fairlane engine with a hydraulic roller cam, stock non-adjustable rockers, and custom pushrods.  I think the adjusters will hit the top of the covers when the revs get up there.

Heya ... just curious, did you use the tall gaskets? 

I ended up getting a set of 427 pent-roofs as a backup plan.  These are the marine style with baffles. 

Meantime, I have a spare set of the chrome mini-pent roof types like the ones in your picture available as part of the chrome dress up kit on 7-Litres and other models.  Tom Lucas at FE Specialties (who built the motor) said I need about 3/8" clearance with these covers using tall gaskets.  I'm not sure if I can get that space out of them.   

I have a perfect set of chrome covers ready to bolt on.  But if I do any welding on them, I have to be very careful.  Otherwise it can yellow or distort the chrome.  The hope is I can cut the baffles to create the clearance I need before welding it all back together without impacting the chrome surface.  I have a spare set so I'll use them as the guinea pig. 

I'm very fortunate to have a good friend who runs one of the last remaining show-quality chrome shops here in the Bay area.   He won't steer me wrong on advice and he can also help if needed.     

If I can't get the baffles to clear, then I'll probably just go with the 427 pent-roofs.  I have a PI intake and long-style cast iron headers, so they won't be out of place.  It's just that the theme of my car has been to keep it very stock and original looking ... with upgrades like stroker, QTP cutous, quick ratio steering, etc all hidden from view.

Roger, Could you email me the name of that chrome shop please? I may be in the market for some chrome work. Thanks, Bob

Bob - just sent you an email.

I have a black 1966 Galaxie 7-Litre that's near done with a frame-off resto. The motor was built by Tom Lucas at FE Specialties who's done a great job. While there are a lot of goodies inside the motor (SCAT 4.250"/6.7" stroker, Diamond 9.8-1 pistons, ported heads with 2.09/1.66 valves, Crower roller cam, Morel lifters, T&D rockers, etc), by and large I've prided myself on maintaining the car's factory appearance from top to bottom. Other than an MSD distributor, Holley 750DP, RWL tires and bullet caps, all the mods cannot be readily seen.

My plan was to top the motor with a perfect set of chrome mini pent-roof valve covers which were optioned on my car as part of the "chrome dress-up" kit. However, even with the tall Felpros & double gaskets, the baffles will not clear the roller rockers. We even tried flattening the baffles somewhat to gain added clearance, but no luck.

Overall, I need about 3/8” with thick gaskets (or 1/2” with normal gaskets). Not sure if I can squeeze that much room out of the baffles, or if I can remove them and create something different. But going without baffles is not an option due to risk of oil seepage/blowby.

So my question is, has anyone modified stock FE mini pent-roofs like the ones shown in this Ebay auction in order to clear roller rockers?

I know about the spacers from Branda and Medice http://www.medicemfg.com/) but I'd rather not go that route. If I cannot modify the original factory type baffles to gain proper clearance, then I'll go with the R-code pent-roof types which were available on other models in 1966. The motor already has the 427 cast iron headers and PI intake.

Thanks in advance.

That's good feedback, thanks.  I didn't realize consensus is that Edelbrock RPMs only offer a marginal upgrade over factory heads when installed out of box.  Moreover, from what you shared, it sounds like even if porting was done, the cast iron headers negate these gains.  Is that for real?  I always had the impression the 1965-66 Ford 427 cast iron headers had very good flow and were as good as most headers out there.  Maybe my info is outdated.  If so I wouldn't be surprised.  Either way not trying to doubt you but instead learn. 

As for the 9-inch ratios, you are right they are "3.50" and "3.70" rather than 3.55/3.73. 

I understand what you mean about how a jump from 3.25's to 3.50's wouldn't be very noticeable, however I would do that in conjunction with a David Kees wide ratio conversion.  Currently the Toploader has a 2.32-1 1st gear.  Together with the 3.25 rear end, the starting line ratio is 7.54.  As you know that's a dog off the line. 

With the Kees conversion, the Toploader will have a 2.78 1st gear.  So if I went with 3.50 rears, SLR goes to 9.73.  That’s about a 23% change.  From what I understand, I'll definitely feel the difference.  I'm not expecting that will turn the car into a dragster outta the hole.  But it should be a nice improvement.

Good point about RPMs at cruise speed vs engine longevity.  This is certainly worth taking into consideration. 

Again, appreciate all your feedback. 

Question:  You say standard block, and then bored .040".  If it is standard now, I would not bore it more than .010" to clean up the cylinders and keep the cylinder walls as thick as possible.  If it is already +.040", I definitely would not stroke it any more than you have without a sonic check to verify cylinder wall thickness left.  Money spent now on the parts you actually want will be cheaper than reworking the combination after you re-ring and assemble it.  Do it the way you want now, not later.   I would go with the Scat rods, also.  My 428 broke a rod in three pieces and took out the block just like the picture Warren posted on the FE forum.  Joe-JDC

Joe, thanks for your input.  When the motor was built in 1995, I cringed a bit when the shop told me they bored it .040.  They knew Fords (and FEs) and I understood they knew what they were doing ... but I knew it meant there wasn't going to be a lot left. 

This time around the block is coming out for a freshen.  I just finished restoring the car (frame-off) and now I want to be sure the motor is tight for the foreseeable future.  Already it looks like the rear main is leaking just a bit. 

Given the car is done, which took many years, I want to drive and enjoy it.  So I want to have complete confidence in everything top to bottom.  Originally I didn't plan to have the motor built then finish the car 20 years later.  But that's what happened.  So now I want the peace of mind knowing the motor is sound for the foreseeable future.  I've also realized I need to address the gearing for proper SLR and cruise speed.  Hence, why that part of the plan is defined as part of the motor "build". 

You mentioned Scat rods ... why them over Eagle H-beam?  I have no preference, just want to understand your thoughts. 

As mentioned to Kevin, right now it seems sensible to add Edelbrock RPM heads, a cam and to port match.  I'll also update the rods plus I want the Moroso 7qt pan & pickup.  Lastly, I'm planning to address the gearing one way or another - either with the David Kees wide-ratio conversion + 3.55/3.73 rear gears or something else. 

Beyond that, not sure.  Still thinking about hyd roller vs flat tappet cam and other stuff.   In the end, I don't want to overbuild the motor.   I want to match the build to what I already have including short block (with new rods), intake, exhaust, carb, etc.  The end-result needs to fit my intended use which is basically street driving (some heavy foot) and occasional highway cruising.

I posted this on the FE Engine forum ... but I've also been a reader at FE Power for sometime too.  So I figured I'd ask the same questions here.   

To start, I've had my 1966 Galaxie 7-Litre since 1995. Motor was built by a reputable Ford shop which is still in business today. I was slowly restoring the car so I didn't put a lot of miles on it. I'd estimate less than 5,000 since the build.

Now I’m planning to pull the 428 for a re-fresh (new gaskets, seals, rings, etc). While I’m at it, now is the time to consider making a few upgrades. But first, here’s my current setup:

Motor - 428FE (1966) standard block, bored .040
Carb - Holley 750DP
Intake - Ford Cobra Jet medium riser dual plane intake
Exhaust - 427 cast iron headers, 2.5” dual with H-pipe, QTP electric cutouts
Pistons - stock type 10.5-1 TRW cast iron
Rods - stock with ARP bolts
Heads - standard C6AE-R
Head work - bronze guides, hardened seats, 3-way valve job, heli-coiled, stainless valves, HD valve springs
Cam - Speed Pro CS1025R Hydraulic; Duration: 292⁰ (214⁰ @ .050) INT / 302⁰ (224⁰ @ .050) EXH, Lift: .510 (.295 lobe) / .536 (.310 lobe), Overlap 112⁰
Block work - oil mods including 5/8” pickup, CJ oil filter adaptor, CJ windage tray, ARP dist rod, block machining & chamfering, Melling HV oil pump, head restrictors
Transmission - Ford toploader close ratio with 2.32-1 first gear
Rear gears - 3.25 Ford 9”
Tire height - 29” / 255-70-15 rears
Vehicle weight - about 4,200lbs
Starting line ratio - 7.54 (2.32 x 3.25)
Intended usage - heavy-footed street; strong low/mid-range torque; decent idle/vacuum; 65-70 mph cruise speed at 2,500-2,800 rpms
Planned modifications - David Kees wide-ratio conversion kit; 3.55 or 3.73 rear gears, 7qt deep sump pan & pickup (C8AX-6675-A / or Milodon)

As you can see, the motor already has the CJ dual plane manifold, 427 cast iron headers, 750cfm carb, 4 speed and good exhaust (plus the FE oil mods). Seems it would be pretty easy to add Survival, Blue Thunder or Edelbrock RPM heads with 2.09/1.66 valves. I’d also have the port-matching done as needed.  As of now I'm planning on doing both. 

I know a car this big needs low-end power/torque. I plan to do the Kees wide-ratio conversion and change the ring/pinion to 3.55 or 3.73 for improved SLR. But I also know the motor has to be built with this kind of size/weight in mind. So beyond the heads, I’m not sure how to plan the best design.

Here are my questions:
- Which heads do you recommend (Ed, BT, Survival, Bear Block, etc)?
- Does a roller cam make sense for this package and intended use?
- If so, is it worth the investment?  I understand it entails a Retrofit kit with cam/lifters plus a steel dist gear & custom length pushrods.
- If I go roller cam, do I need to change the rockers given the intended use and likely RPM range? (not talking rollers, but that I heard Ford rockers can be a weakness)
- What cam/profile is recommended? (Understand more lift and shorter/medium duration is generally better for big vehicles with torque motors)

As you can see, I don’t want to overbuild the motor. I also understand that as I add more horsepower, the power curve moves up the RPM scale while making the band narrower & steeper. Likewise, I get that the importance of a combined package where the sweet spots of the cam, heads, intake, carb, compression ratio, headers and exhaust are in the same RPM range.

Again, this car is intended for street use, though I like to drive heavy-footed. I’m seeking a nice power band, heavy at the lower end but strong pull through mid-4s or low-5s. I don’t mind if the top is 5,500 rpms. I’d also like to cruise at 65-70mph turning around 2,500 rpms.

This car is restored and very original/stock appearing.  I want to retain that appeal as much as possible. 

Any help/insight/advice is GREATLY appreciated.