361 Industrial Engine/ Austin Healey Roadster

[frnkeore]

I just bought, at auction, this 361 for $260.

It has a slave cyl clutch, with a NP 4 speed and a tach drive dist.

I haven't quite figured out what I will do with it but, it will be fun to open it up and see what I have. The first thing I'll do is pull the core plugs and check the cylinder walls.

[blykins]

That's how JJ started. 

Throw it on a dyno!

[frnkeore]

It will be more fun to disassemble it.

These only have 1.75 x 1.5 valves in the heads and a lower rpm cam, than a 360. The ex manifolds, look a lot better than the FE logs.

I've been thinking of what I could do with the crank though.

[blykins]

It will be more fun to disassemble it.

These only have 1.75 x 1.5 valves in the heads and a lower rpm cam, than a 360. The ex manifolds, look a lot better than the FE logs.

I've been thinking of what I could do with the crank though.

The block will need a bushing in it if you want to run a standard car distributor. 

The crank will need a lot of work as well.  The snouts and flywheel flanges are completely different.   Otherwise, they make really good steel cranks for higher hp builds. 

[thatdarncat]

Look on the side of the block and see where it was cast. If it has the Dearborn Iron Foundry (DIF) logo there’s a chance it has the 428 cylinder cores. If it’s a Michigan Casting Center (MCC) block then it won’t have 428 cylinder cores, but will likely still be a nice block to build.

[frnkeore]

Yes, I do know about the dist and crank and rods. The oil pump is a little different, too.

I like the tach drive so, I may keep the dist.

[frnkeore]

Look on the side of the block and see where it was cast. If it has the Dearborn Iron Foundry (DIF) logo there’s a chance it has the 428 cylinder cores. If it’s a Michigan Casting Center (MCC) block then it won’t have 428 cylinder cores, but will likely still be a nice block to build.

Thanks Kevin, I'll check that first, after I pressure wash it.

[427John]

The 361HD should have 4 ring pistons if so it will have the shorter rods with the big bolts and will be the same casting number as the 427 LR rods if 67 or earlier and the same casting number as 428CJ rods if 67 or later.The oil pump will use the same housing as the 427/428CJ pumps with the long relief passage for the HP spring,the drive hex will be larger though.If 68 and later it will have the good large port car type oil filter adapter.The exhaust valves should be sodium filled and the heads exhaust crossover will be sourced from the exhaust manifold between the 2 center exhaust ports instead of the interior of the exhaust port,you should see some extra metal cast there to accommodate it.I always liked the looks of the FT exhaust manifold but they aren't a straight bolt on to FE heads.It will be interesting to see if those heads are large or small port heads.If they are large port maybe you could install large valves in them to facilitate running the FT manifolds if you were a mind to.Also keep in mind that the cranks weren't completely internal balance,maybe they would be with a lighter piston but those 4 ring slugs were really heavy.I don't know if the factory pistons had them but some of the aftermarket replacements had armored steel ring land inserts cast into them.

[frnkeore]

Thanks John, I will check for those things, as I disassemble it.

[plovett]

Does the 361 forged crank have solid crank pins?  As I am typing this I am thinking not?  Just wondering how crazy you could get with offset grinding it, if you wanted to.

pl

[thatdarncat]

Does the 361 forged crank have solid crank pins?  As I am typing this I am thinking not?  Just wondering how crazy you could get with offset grinding it, if you wanted to.

pl

This D2TE-A forged 361 crank I have sitting around has a small hole on the front & rear rod journals, no hole on the middle 2 rod journals.

If a 361/391 has been through a rebuilder they often have 3 ring pistons, the last couple I’ve taken apart had those.

[427John]

Kevin of course you're right about the rebuilder pistons I think some were 4 ring but not all,it may have been dependent on whether they were 359/389MD or 361/391HD but I'm not sure about that.I've never had an original MD engine apart they were always rebuilds.The rebuilds were seldom of the same quality as the original FT engines most fleet mechanics would agree that they were lucky to get half-2/3's the service life that the originals gave.

[wsu0702]

If it's a DIF block engine when you pull the bellhousing and transmission off check behind the flywheel for a factory scratch mark on the rear bulkhead.  Very few FT blocks were cast with 428 water jacket cores but you might get lucky.  If there is no scratch mark it probably does not have thick cylinder walls unless it was cast in late '73 or early '74.  I used to search for FT engines/blocks back in the '90s and early '00s.  Of the several dozen that I looked at a grand total of 3 had scratch marks and 428 water jacket cores.  So they are not as common as a lot of guys claim.

[FE4SPDMustang]

I have seen several late D4TE blocks that were 4.130 with .150+ left on the thrust side.  The early A scratch blocks seem to be hit and miss for thickness. Many I saw were done at .040 over. I have only seen a couple A scratch blocks with web reinforcements,. The C scratch all seem to have them. Often you have no idea what you have until you get into them. It makes it hard to purchase for particular use without a sonic check anymore.

[wsu0702]

I have seen several late D4TE blocks that were 4.130 with .150+ left on the thrust side.  The early A scratch blocks seem to be hit and miss for thickness. Many I saw were done at .040 over. I have only seen a couple A scratch blocks with web reinforcements,. The C scratch all seem to have them. Often you have no idea what you have until you get into them. It makes it hard to purchase for particular use without a sonic check anymore.

Kerry Wortman has documented some A scratch blocks that had the extra web reinforcements.  If I ever find one I am going to buy it just for talking purposes to show folks that they do exist. They seem to be pretty rare.

[FE4SPDMustang]

My original Sept 66 A scratch casting lacked the crank reinforcement. As a matter of fact the block was very thin in general. I have seen a couple that have cracked in the main web.

[frnkeore]

Regarding the 4 ring pistons and the "armored steel ring land inserts", TRW describes them as "Power Grooves".

From what I'm seeing, they never made 4 groove PG pistons for the 391, from '64 - 76, nor are they listed in my '89 TRW catalog.

The 361, 4 groove, PG, L201NF, truck and industrial pistons, where made from '64 - '74 and aren't listed in my '75 Ford Truck Repair Manual. There must have been at least one other 4 groove piston though, you can see a listing for rings that have, three 5/64 rings and a 3/16 oil ring but, it's list in the 361 info as well as a odd ball, 3 ring with a 1/4 oil ring.

[frnkeore]

I picked it up, this morning, pressure washed it and checked some things out but, I had to take my wife to the doc, this after noon.

It is a DIF and has AA-1 cast, below the oil filter and a date code, that I haven't made out yet. Anyone know what the AA-1 is?

It has 62, above the 352 on the front of the block so, I knocked out a expansion plug and measure the cyl wall gap, it is .190 so, it has good thickness. if they are centered, I will have .155, with a 4.13 bore. I have to sonic them when I get it tore down but, it makes me hopefull.

This is the tag that was on it, anyone care to define it?

[427John]

Sounds like it might be a 60's vintage engine vs a 70's vintage,I'm just now realizing that the 361 actually predated the 360 since it and the 391 became available sometime in 1964.My father in laws 65 F600 had one in it and I never considered that the 361 came out earlier.Look for the 428 cast into the water jackets,being a pre 70's DIF FT block its a possibility.

[blykins]

I picked it up, this morning, pressure washed it and checked some things out but, I had to take my wife to the doc, this after noon.

It is a DIF and has AA-1 cast, below the oil filter and a date code, that I haven't made out yet. Anyone know what the AA-1 is?

It has 62, above the 352 on the front of the block so, I knocked out a expansion plug and measure the cyl wall gap, it is .190 so, it has good thickness. if they are centered, I will have .155, with a 4.13 bore. I have to sonic them when I get it tore down but, it makes me hopefull.

This is the tag that was on it, anyone care to define it?

I'd rather have a 4.080" bore and a thicker wall.   From what I've seen, the advantage just isn't that great on a 460ci FE versus a 445-447ci FE.  I'd rather have the extra cylinder wall thickness for extra ring seal, future overbore, or more cushion in case there's a pit that you don't see with a drill bit or sonic tester. 

[turbohunter]

in case there's a pit that you don't see with a drill bit or sonic tester.

I can vouch that this is true. My first mustang block was a C scratch that sonic’d and looked perfect.
Got it on the dyno and it popped a hole in between where you would do the sonic checks.

[frnkeore]

I remembered, last night, that I have a brochure on the industrial engines and answered one of my questions with it. The C4PB-6003-C is apparently the part number and the C4PB, is the model number, according to the brochure. I still don't know what the S02690E means, on the model line of the tag.

This brochure is dated 12/68 and the pictured engine, has pent roof VC's, mine has domed Powered By Ford, VC's, so it should be closer to '64.  When did the first pent roof's appear? I'll take some picture of the engine today. It's still on the trailer and I need to get the trans, FW and bellhousing off, to check the back of the block, before getting it on a stand.

I tested only one pair of cylinder cores (7-8) but, will check all of them once I get it on a stand. I check, with T-handle, allen wrenches, they give a much better feel, than drill bits. On this check, a 3/16 wrench, would go threw the walls and it was not loose, it would stay and hold. My 5mm wrench (.197), would not enter, at any point.

Fords, original thickness spec for the FE car, cylinder wall, is .170 and the max overbore call out is .060, leaving .140 wall. I can only assume, that it left some tolerance for core shift although, I couldn't find that info.

My plan, at this time, is to have a bore, between 4.125 & 4.130. I'm not shooting for a 460 but, will offset grind this crank, to 3.73 (BBC) or 3.83 stroke, with a SBC journal. I have a source of 6.560 long SBC rods. So, I'm shooting for a 399 - 410 ci engine.

[blykins]

in case there's a pit that you don't see with a drill bit or sonic tester.

I can vouch that this is true. My first mustang block was a C scratch that sonic’d and looked perfect.
Got it on the dyno and it popped a hole in between where you would do the sonic checks.

Around 15 years ago, I ruined two standard bore D4TE blocks that sonic tested perfectly by trying to bore them to a 4.130" bore.   I learned my lesson. 

[Henrysnephew]

Curious Brent, ruined because of internal pitting or from inaccurate sonic test?  Randy M

[blykins]

Curious Brent, ruined because of internal pitting or from inaccurate sonic test?  Randy M

It was pitting. 

[Joe-JDC]

I have a 68.5 428 CJ that sat with antifreeze in the engine for some years, but was still holding the antifreeze.  I tore the engine down, flushed out the block and heads, disassembled the engine, and put the block on an engine stand.  I removed the freeze plugs, and took my portable sand blaster and blasted down into every water hole around the cylinders, and thoroughly removed all rust and scale on the cylinders in the water jackets.  I then did a sonic check of the bores at 12 points in each bore, and found the block capable of a +.065" overbore and still have the .125" on all thrust areas.  Removing all the rust made a believer out of me in the accuracy of sonic testing, and it eliminates any pitting mistakes where you got a false reading from the rust scale.  It was a lot of work, was messy, but worth the effort to have a solid sonic sheet that I trust. 
Joe-JDC

[frnkeore]

Tore it down to the long block today and took some more pictures. The C scratch is sets very high.

It's had to tell what the marking is, under the oil filter. One set looks like 1 or I AA the other set of numbers I can't make out well at all. One of them looks like it might be a 5 so, maybe a '65 block?

The 40 DIF, is at the top rear of the drivers side.

The flywheel is weighted and I think the reason that this engine, was taken out of service, was it was running ruff and using a lot of oil, as you can see. It had had a resent valve job, with new rocker shafts and stands.

[427John]

Frank,what your seeing near the oil filter adapter may be W1 instead of AA1 and the top of the W is cut off by casting shift.W1 or E1 is a common sight there on FE's.

[frnkeore]

John, I think your right!

I looked on the mustangtec site and I found a CJ block that looks a lot like my block. They call it a '70 CJ block but, I think it started life as a Industrial/Truck block, with the boss and threaded hole, for the truck oil pickup and the plug for the compressor oil return.

http://mustangtek.com/block/1970428CJBlock.html

It also has no casting number, heavy C scratch and a date code like mine.

Anyone want to take a stab at what a W 1 or I means?

Edit:
After looking more closely at my 4 digit number, I think I see that same 0 with the same 2 dots under it so it would be a '70. staring at the second digit, it looks like it might be a G so, Sept and then, maybe the 16th.

[frnkeore]

Although I haven't found a 428 casting number yet. I'll look some more after it back from the hot tank.

It does have the good block webbing and a solid crank throw. So, I'm thinking I will have it offset ground to 1.889 or 2.100 journals.

[wsu0702]

John, I think your right!

I looked on the mustangtec site and I found a CJ block that looks a lot like my block. They call it a '70 CJ block but, I think it started life as a Industrial/Truck block, with the boss and threaded hole, for the truck oil pickup and the plug for the compressor oil return.

http://mustangtek.com/block/1970428CJBlock.html

It also has no casting number, heavy C scratch and a date code like mine.

Anyone want to take a stab at what a W 1 or I means?

Yep that block on MustangTek is for sure an FT block.  No one knows for sure but the most popular theory is that the "W1" and "E1" above the date code indicate which casting line the block was cast in.

Edit:
After looking more closely at my 4 digit number, I think I see that same 0 with the same 2 dots under it so it would be a '70. staring at the second digit, it looks like it might be a G so, Sept and then, maybe the 16th.

[frnkeore]

Well, I got my TFS heads for this build today. They were about 1 week late (not Brents Fault) because FedEx is having issues with not having enough employee's in the Portland area. They were waiting in a trailer, to be sorted, to my area. I think me calling them, hurried it up. So, be aware anything going threw Portland, may be late, to arrive!

I spent the rest of the day, looking them over and measuring things. The valve spacing is 2.025, as opposed to the stock 1.980 of the LR valve and lifter spacing. The CL of the LR valves is offset .170 and TFS, offset is .160. So the increased push rod angle, will be nearly centered on the lifters.

I haven't fully sonic tested this block yet but, I did a few spots when I was doing my Edsel engine and there is a lot of cylinder wall in it. Based on the spots I measured, I can go at least 4.16 on it but, I don't think I'll go more than 4.13. I sent a quote request to RaceTec today for 4.13x3.83 pistons. This block doesn't have 428 in the water jacket but, I believe it is a little thicker than even those. As I said .187 won't go all the way threw the cyl gaps.

I have the rods in hand and they are Eagle, H beam LS rods, 4340 steel, ARP 7/16 2000 bolts, 6.560 long. I measured them yesterday and the big ends are at the low end @ 2.2245 and the small ends are .928 and they weigh 643g. Nice rods! I'll put a picture up, when I get the sonic done on the block. They have more @ $350 a set, if you interested in offset grinding a crank.

ATTN Jay.
If you could move this over to the Project section, It would save a lot of re-writing on my part.

 

[frnkeore]

Here are pictures of the rods.

I forgot to mention that the C-C length, was with in .0002 of 6.560.

[frnkeore]

It's been a while since I've up dated this so, here the newest info.

I did a sonic test on it with the same tester as Jay uses and the result are pictured. It's a very thick block! It does have one thin area, 3.5" down, on the minor side, that's .188. The bore will be 4.150 so, that still leaves .138 and that still leaves room for a final bore of 4.190.

Regarding the accuracy of these testers, mine seems to be, overall within 2%. I checked the front and rear china wall about 6, or more times, while doing the measurements. The front dist cut out measured .216 and my readings ranged from .212 - .215. The rear oil plug cut out, measured .184 and measured .180 - .182. But, that #4 cylinder was concerning so, I averaged the side wall thicknesses with the exception of the outside of the end cyl on both banks and got .204 average, for the 12 positions, 3.5 down. In my cyl gap testing, a .187 Allen wrench, wouldn't go fully between the walls at the Welch plug holes so, if I use .180 as the gap, that would come out to be .200 wall thickness (4.63 - .180 - 4.050 = .400/2 = .200). That's were I get my 2% accuracy, is the difference between the measurements.

I got the pistons on order. They're coming from Ross, through Mark, at Probe. The bore is 4.150 and the rings are 1.5x1.5x3mm, the ring Set is Nitride Stainless Top _ Napier Second _ Flow Vent Low Tension Oil. Flat top with minimum depth valve relief for .700 lift. They have a 8 week lead time.

Next, the intake. I had a Dominator and 850, that I was going to use to get the engine going but, Brent put his Tunnel Ram, up for sale so, I bought it. I would like to run the Dominator first and then swap out the TR but, I might just run the TR and be done with it???

[410bruce]

That's great, Frank! Glad your block is one of the good ones.
That tunnel ram set-up is awesome. Looks purposeful and intimidating. 

[frnkeore]

Thank you, Bruce.

If nothing else, it will be a beauty queen

[frnkeore]

Well, it's been a few months since I've updated this. I've got most of the parts now. And here are the spec's:

Jay's adapter
Weiand TR, and pair of 4150, 660 cfm carbs
TFS heads
Eagle 6.560 rods, 2.100 big end, .928 small
361 crank, offset ground to 3.81 stroke w/2.100 journals
Custom FT, 2618 Ross pistons, 4.150, 1.5x1.5x3mm
Shell SFT lifters, 263 x 269 @ .050, .615 x .630 Jones cam. Jones couldn't get a core to grind so, I went to a similar timed Bullet Cam.

I'm also, building my own water pump and drive stub for this engine.

My original intent for this engine, was as a dyno mule and it still will go on the dyno but, I came across the ad, for this car on Friday and bought it on Sunday. It is a Austin Healey replica, call a Sebring II, by Classic Roadsters Ltd and I will install the 412 in it, most likely, with a C4 trans and a 9" rear (it has a Must II in it now).

The engine bay, is pretty wide,  I think I can get a FE in it but, they are made for SBF & SBC.

I love the Austin Healey body, I had a 100-6, in Sept '62, after getting out of HS. It was the first car I bought, on my own. I personally think they look much better than the Cobra's.

I believe the car will weight between 2500 and 2700 lb, when finished. I'm going to try to set it up, to take both the FE and the SBF so, it can be a rolling dyno.

The first picture is my 100-6, from '62, after I had it painted Ford Aquamarine blue.

[GJCAT427]

Frank what did you do with the stock flywheel and clutch assy?  I`m looking for some FT stuff for a truck I`m building. It's going to be for hauling my car trailer around. Garry (GJCAT).

[frnkeore]

I still have it all, in good condition but, it has some rust.

[frnkeore]

I had to change cam suppliers, because Jones couldn't say when he could get a blank to grind it. I went with Bullet and similar timing. It is now 264/272 @ .050, lift .645/.640, both cams with asymmetric lobes.

I also thought that I would add a link, to the weight reduction I did on the intake:

http://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=10538.0

Next up will be the Dominator, IR modification I'm doing on the TR base. Should have that done in 2 or 3 weeks.

[frnkeore]

I made a little more progress, in the last week. I picked up a matching 4500 carb and I found a Top Loader for it.

The carbs, look absolutely awesome, setting on the TR lower and they are 5lb lighter than the Weiand upper, with the two 660's.

The TL is close ratio, off of a 70's 351c 4v and is a small in & out but, I think it will be fine for this ~2600 lb car. I weighted it and with the Hurst shifter, it's 110 lb. I'm now going to order a 52" wide (across the axle flanges) 35 spline rear axle. I could probably get by with a 31 spline but, they are the same price.

I thought I would add is update, that I did in another thread:

http://fepower.net/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=11054.0

[frnkeore]

I've made some progress on this combo.

I now have the intake options finished. I now have the original 2 x 660, 2 x 1050 plenum and 2 x 1050 IR. The 2 x 1050 plenum are 2 upside down super suckers, to feed the runners evenly.

The rear end is a Dutchman, 35 spline, with a Quick Performance aluminum, 4 bolt spool, with a 3 link mounting, of my design. 14" wheels, with 14 x 27.7 tires.

I had a thread on the roll bar problem I had and finally have it resolved. My fab guy, talked to the NHRA inspector a couple of weeks ago and got approval to do a cage like a hard top and will certify it to 8.50. This will be done on Sat (3/25) and that's a big load off me. I had been worrying about that, since I got the car.

[machoneman]

So what is you estimated hp with this engine combo? Btw, your massive amount of work to lighten the intakes is amazing. We also need a pic of the entire car so far if that's not hard to do.

[frnkeore]

Thanks for the kind words on the intake.

I'm figuring on ~650 hp.

I'll take some more pictures after I get it home on the trailer, tomorrow or Sunday. Then I have to disassemble the rear end and do the finish machine work on it.

[frnkeore]

Well, it was a real "nail biter" on Sat!

I misunderstood my fab guy. It wasn't the inspector he talked to, it was the track operator. It turns out that the inspector was a old school guy and went strictly by the book. He failed me They (fab and operator) were looking at convertible rules, which I hadn't looked at and are apparently kinda vague. Still haven't looked at them.

The inspector discounted the convertible rules and looked at it as a roadster. That because it didn't have a "removable hard top, like a C1 Corvette or 55-57 T-bird. These are VERY screwy rules!!! With NO other differences, you can run a door slammer cage on a open top car IF it came from the factory as a option with a removable HT! So, I told him that they did come that way but, he said I'd have to show him. I went home and found the evidence and called him and he came yesterday, took pictures of my screen shots and certified it. WHAT A RELIEF!! Between tubing, labor and cert, I have $4900 in this cage.

He turned out to be a very nice guy and told me I can upgrade it to 7.5 with a few mods and explained them to me as well as giving me the NHRA drawings to do it.

Like I said, the rules are screwy, you do not have to run the removable HT BUT, you have to run a "convertible type rag top", over the cage! It doesn't even have to be attached to a windshield, just the bars.

Anyway, here it is in it's certified state.