361 Industrial Engine/ Austin Healey Roadster

[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.