My 427 Build

[1967 XR7 GT]

I am finally getting some work done on a long neglected project, my 67 XR7 GT Mercury Cougar, car was park in 84 with a rod nock, I had picked up many years ago a 67 427 SO block to build to go in place of the 390, and I am finally getting around to doing it.

I pretty much want to stay away from chinese parts, so I picked up an early factory steel 427 crank for my build, it came with grooved mains which there is a little bearing issue, this particular crank comes with 2 additional counterweights off the center main, and I had the crank sent to Performance Crankshaft (Adney Brown) to get worked over. 

My side oiler block I just dropped off at Costa Mesa R&D Machine Shop, for a cleaning and initial check up, The block is currently std bore, and would prefer to stay as close as possible to that size.

This build is going to take a while, so I have decided to pull the 390 and throw a crank and a set of rods in to get it running, here are the current eng & car spec's:

 390
 428 SCJ Heads
 Offy Port a Sonic
 Cam: Old Greg Foreman-Gus Davis Grind .612" lift, Dur 312*-258@.050
 2 1/8" Hooker's
 Built C-6, 3,500 Stall
 Locker 4:57

The car was a blast and had less than 500 miles on the engine build before the rod went, probably a spun bearing ?  The rod went during a pass at the drag strip @ 7,000 rpm 2nd gear, with only a 5 quart pan and no oil restrictors in the heads, so I think the all the oil was in the valve covers and the rods were starved for oil ?  I left the headers un-corked and drove it home with the rod-nock.

[plovett]

Hi, you had talked to me about one of my 391 cranks a few months ago.   

As to your question, I do think your explanation for the rod failure makes sense.  5 quarts is not a lot for an FE and no restriction to the top end, combined with 7000 rpm could easily cause oil starvation in my opinion.  Heck, remember that Ford started putting an extra quart of oil in 428CJ's in '69 or '70 to prevent that.   And a stock CJ is not going to go anywhere near 7000 rpm, maybe 6000 rpm at  the very most.   I would suggest getting a deep sump Milodon pan for your next motor, 7-8 quarts of oil, and restricting oil at the rockers to some degree.

I'd like to ask you about your crank if you don't mind.  You said it has center counter weights.  I didn't know any factory cranks had center weights.  What's the story on that?  I remember my machinist extolling the virtues of center weights to me many years ago.

paulie

[jayb]

The car was a blast and had less than 500 miles on the engine build before the rod went, probably a spun bearing ?  The rod went during a pass at the drag strip @ 7,000 rpm 2nd gear, with only a 5 quart pan and no oil restrictors in the heads, so I think the all the oil was in the valve covers and the rods were starved for oil ?  I left the headers un-corked and drove it home with the rod-nock.

That makes perfect sense to me too.  On your new engine run 6 quarts, a windage tray, and restrictors in the heads.  Better yet, put in an 8 quart pan.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Hi paulie

 From what I was able to find out, this crank (C4AE 6303 G) came in the 64 427 HR and in the TBolts and is listed in the 427 7000 RPM Kits and was used as a Nascar Crank.

But I haven't found out anything about the 2 extra counter weights, I did talk to Adney after he received the crank and had a quick look and he said the counterweights could of been welded on after it was forged ? It's currently in the Crank Queue, so when it gets to my turn to get worked on maybe then he can tell if the counterweights were added or if it was forged that way ?

And as for the 391 crank maybe we can work out a deal, and I'll throw it in my 390, I am going to be putting a crank in it anyways, and I know I could have the one in it turned, but something tells me to replace it and the rods too..  I got screwed over on a set of FE rods I bought, they ended up having well over .040" side clearance, which is way too much, instead of eating their purchase price, since the outstanding seller isn't going to refund my money, I am going to fix them, I'll have one of the sides welded up on rods 1 thru 4 to take up the excess clearance between the pairs, and install them in my 390 after I work them over a bit.

Where are you at on your crank ?

Email me and we can discuss the FT crank





Hi Jay

It already has a windage tray, but I will keep the stock pan and run 6 quarts and restrict oil to the heads like you suggested on the 390, but I will get a 7 or 8 quart pan but it will go on the Side Oiler.

[hbstang]

richard,i see that you must be in orange county?i was at johns shop last week and he pointed out your 427 block.did you race your car at ocir?was your 390 built to run 7,000 rpm?dan.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Hi Dan



Yes I live in OC The couple of times I ran my car was at the Terminal Island Raceway arranged by Big Willie, who had made arrangements with some of the shipping companies to set up areas in the terminals for people to come and race, it was popular for as long as it lasted.

I don't think I intended for the motor to run to 7000 rpm, Ron didn't know much about the cam other than the basic specs but felt it would pull to 6000 no problem, it kinda on it's own decided it like going to 7000 and who was I to argue with it...   I thought the cam would be a little too much, but for $60 for a new cam from FPP, I said what the hell, and as it turns out I couldn't of been happier with the choice.

[cjshaker]

If those counterweights were welded on, they sure did a good job!

I thought I'd heard of specially made Nascar cranks made by Ford that had the two extra counterweights, but have never seen one personally. Is yours made for the wider Nascar rods, or stock width FE?

You didn't mention baffles on that 5 quart pan, but it certainly would help keep the oil where it belongs if it's a front sump pan. I can't imagine a front sumped FE pan on a car that pulls off the line hard that could keep the oil near the pick-up. Especially if the front end rises a bunch. They (the pan) even angle slightly rearward which would just make the oil move to the rear easier. It could have just starved by loading the upper with oil, or it may have all gone to the rear and exposed the pick-up. Having it happen in 2nd gear kind of makes me wonder about the latter. Jays video seemed to take a little bit of time before it began to pump the pan dry. Just a thought.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Hi Doug

I have not yet seen the crank other than the pic's, but wouldn't a wide jrl crank have an SK part number instead of the C4AE 6303 G number ?  I will find out what Adney Brown discovers when he works on it, and I am sure if he finds it's a wide jrl crank he will let me know, since it's already .020" on the rods and there are no wide jrl .020" bearings.  I think you may have the correct thinking,  in it's a specialty crank made for Nascar.  What about the 7000 rpm kits, did those cranks come with the extra counterweights, for smoother continuous 7000 rpm running ?

The pan had one big baffle with a hole in it for the oil pump pickup to go thru or is it considered a splash guard ?  Anyways what bothered me was because of the Windage Tray and 2nd gasket the pan was dropped at least a 1/4" away from the pickup, leaving oil in the bottom of the pan that would not be picked up, and I though about extending the pickup but never did...

[cjshaker]

I had only recently heard of the extra counterweight cranks for Nascar, so I'm just going by what I have heard. I would think if that were the case of them being specifically for Nascar then it would have an SK part number like the wide journal cranks. Or maybe the time frame puts them before the wide journal. I'm not sure when they came out....maybe '65 or '66? I learn all the time that there were some specialty parts made in short numbers. Probably during development stages of the 427 which seemed to last almost it's entire career.

Either way, it'll be interesting to see what your crank guy reports back.

[plovett]

Hi paulie

 From what I was able to find out, this crank (C4AE 6303 G) came in the 64 427 HR and in the TBolts and is listed in the 427 7000 RPM Kits and was used as a Nascar Crank.

But I haven't found out anything about the 2 extra counter weights, I did talk to Adney after he received the crank and had a quick look and he said the counterweights could of been welded on after it was forged ? It's currently in the Crank Queue, so when it gets to my turn to get worked on maybe then he can tell if the counterweights were added or if it was forged that way ?

And as for the 391 crank maybe we can work out a deal, and I'll throw it in my 390, I am going to be putting a crank in it anyways, and I know I could have the one in it turned, but something tells me to replace it and the rods too..  I got screwed over on a set of FE rods I bought, they ended up having well over .040" side clearance, which is way too much, instead of eating their purchase price, since the outstanding seller isn't going to refund my money, I am going to fix them, I'll have one of the sides welded up on rods 1 thru 4 to take up the excess clearance between the pairs, and install them in my 390 after I work them over a bit.

Where are you at on your crank ?

Email me and we can discuss the FT crank

Hey Richard!

My crank is still at Adney's place.  I called him last week to check on it.  No work done on it yet.  I told him not to worry about it for now.  He is busy and I don't need my crank back anytime soon.   I think he told he'd like to do two or more of the 391 stroker cranks at the same time.   

That's cool about your steel 427 crank.   I wonder HOW wide the journals are if it is the Nascar deal?  Is an aftermarket "BBC" rod wide enough to work without welding material on the crank or rods?  If my memory is correct Big Chrysler rods are wider yet?

I'll email ya about my other crank.

Also, Mildon has a stock replacement pan with a baffle built in.  I think this is it.   Just FYI.  It's over $100 cheaper than their deep FE pan.

http://www.jegs.com/i/Milodon/697/30740/10002/-1?parentProductId=745643

paulie

edit:  or you could just weld a baffle in to your stock pan.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I had found these links with some info on the crank. So apparently it is a factory crank with the extra counterweights. And it's not a wide jrl crank.

http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/thread/1065149011/Rare+crank

http://www.network54.com/Forum/74182/thread/1169509588/427+ford+steel+crank+part+%23+Help

The 390 with the stock pan, 6 quarts and the heads restricted I think will be fine after I extend the pickup to the bottom of the pan.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Just got back from the machine shop. Block is cleaned, magged and no cracks, it does have one sleeve, and the bore is about 4.241", so about .009" over. So I may have to go to a 4.250" bore, unless I want to spend for custom sized pistons.

It will now get line hone & decked & squared, and probably should do a sonic. And John said it would be no problem honing out to 4.250" from where it's at if I decide to go that size..

[1967 XR7 GT]

I picked up the makings of partial 390 short block project, to get the car running while I slowly build the 427. Block is a D4TE with a fresh .040" over bore and comes with a new set of Federal Mogul forged pistons, and it comes with a C4AE-B crank, the numbers says it's a 64 427 High performance cast iron crank ?, also with new rod, main & cam bearings and a partial set of new rings. There are a set of C7AE-B 3/8" re-sized rods with new bolts, that I am not sure about, and a few other odds & ends.   

I think this was the better option than going thru the rod nocking 390 in the car, which has the original 390 cast pistons, that I am not sure how long would last pulling 6 to 7,000 rpm on a regular basis ?

I am going to have to start sourcing odds and ends to put this motor together, a flex plate, balancer, balancer spacer, oil slinger, wind age tray, and so on. I've put a WTB add in the classifieds.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I just talked to Adney Brown about my crank shaft and he says the two center counter weights were added on. He thinks FORD back in the day went to a company called ATLAS and had them add the two additional counter weights.

Adney said he has not seen one of these cranks before, but the adding of the weights was top quality work.

I should be getting the crank back in Jan, I will post pics of the weights when I do. 

[1967 XR7 GT]

While I was waiting on my machine work, I took the block out and had it dipped.  Got it back today, prepped it and shot on some paint. Waiting to get the line hone done so the bearings can be installed and measured, then I can have the crank machined to the clearance I want.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Today after a closer inspection, I found the main caps had wear indentations from where the main cap bolts where tightened on the caps.  And because I am going to be running ARP main cap studs that use washers, the washers require a flat surface so the studs can be properly torqued.
It was a simple procedure to machine the top of the caps so to have a flat surface.

[jayb]

Nice attention to detail.  A lot of people don't think of stuff like that.

[1967 XR7 GT]

To expedite my line hone, I mounted & torqued the mains with spacers in place. I installed the spacers in the locations they were marked for with the nuts to the main cap studs hand tight, the spacers had some interference fit while installing them in their locations. Now after torqueing the mains, the spacers have loosened up and I am able to rotate them on the cross bolts.  Checking clearance, the smallest feeler I had was .0015" and was able to slide it between the block and spacer on 2 of them.


I have a question, what is the max clearance allowed for the cross bolt spacers ?

[jayb]

I'm pretty sure that there is no clearance spec on those spacers; they are supposed to be an interference fit, even after torquing the main cap bolts.  I assume you have this clearance with the cross bolts torqued in addition to the mains?  If so, I'd consider adding some shim stock between the cap and the spacer to get back to an interference fit.

[XR7]

You torque the main caps first without spacers or cross bolts in place. Then insert the spacers, they should be almost hard to get in there (have no clearance), but not have to "beat" them in. They have three sizes with a range from .3725 to .3775 so maybe you will have to replace a couple, or maybe you can try again, and possibly move spacers around to get a good fit. I believe Doug at Precision oil pumps may have made up some for people needing to dial that in.

Here is a Ford blueprint on the cross bolted caps, notice it says to torque the main caps first, then place the spacers, it also shows the correct sequence which is a little different than you would think. Also, torque the cross bolts in two steps (at least 3 steps on the main caps). Check it out...

[Bad Byrd]

Today after a closer inspection, I found the main caps had wear indentations from where the main cap bolts where tightened on the caps.  And because I am going to be running ARP main cap studs that use washers, the washers require a flat surface so the studs can be properly torqued.
It was a simple procedure to machine the top of the caps so to have a flat surface.

When my 406 was being built I remember this taking place as well, I would think it should be done with Bolts or studs! Like you I ran Studs so it was a must but probably a good idea to have it done regardless.

[1967 XR7 GT]

No, the spacers tightened up when the side bolts were torqued. I started doing some reading on this to get an idea and found it was a practice to dimple the spacer boss on the block to take up clearance, mentioned in this article: http://www.mustangandfords.com/techarticles/mdmp_1209_aluminun_head_427_fe_real_iron_part_1/, but I would use shim stock to take up clearance before I would dimple the block.

I will just go slightly wider spacers, I checked Precision oil Pumps site but no spacers were listed, I'll make some if I have too.

XR7 thanks for the picture of the blue print, and it looks like the spacers need to be in place when the caps are torqued but not the cross bolts, which I thought having the spacers in when torqueing should be done. And I did find the torque spec's & sequence for the cross bolts and this spec for the spacers: .000" - .001", but that was the only one.

The only thing I did wrong was I should of put a pre-load on the caps instead of just tightening the nuts finger tight, then I would of seen the spacers clearance from the beginning.
 
Bad Byrd, I don't think it's as critical with bolts, to a point, but if I had stayed with bolts , I still would of cleaned up the caps.

I want the block work done so I can have the crank finished, then I'll install it and a cam then shelf it, so then I can focus all my attention on the 390 short block, which is mostly cleaning and assembly.

And guys thanks for all the good tips & help.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I had also posted the clearance question on FORD FE.com.

I wanted a number and now I got one: Find .000" then add .003"
now the fun begins.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I took measurements of the spacer clearances last week, I decided to set them all up with a +.001" to +.0015" interference fit.  I went ahead and ordered all new spacers made from the EDM shop.

I picked up the new spacers today, and did a test fit and everything has a nice tight fit. But there's a slight problem, the spacers were made from a heat treated chrome-moly material, and when I went to engrave the spacer locations on the spacers with an electric engraving tool it would barely leave a mark. I'll go by my buddies shop tomorrow and use his electric welding engraver that I have used before to number rods instead of using a numbers punch which can distort the big end of rods hammering numbers on them.

Looks like I will get the line hone done next week, then I can get the mains measured so the crank can be ground.

I have had the crank completely worked over, Bull Nosed the leading edge of the counter weights, and Knifed edge the trailing edges, just waiting on the main bearing specs so the mains can be ground, then it will be sent out to be nitrided.

[1967 XR7 GT]

The got the new spacers marked for their locations, installed and torqued. The line hone will hopefully get done next week, then I can get the bearings measured. I hate how some of this stuff just drags on.

[cjshaker]

Hey, that looks EXACTLY like a factory marking. That must have been how Ford did it.
This is exactly where FEs, especially cross bolted ones and sideoilers, require special attention by a machinist who knows what he's doing and is experienced with them. It does take more time and effort, but everything worth having does You're going about it the right way.

[428GT500]

Hello,
Who's doing the spacers? I am replacing main caps lost on my 427 and I will likely have to have new spacers made.

                                                                                Regards,
                                                                                           -Keith

[1967 XR7 GT]

Hi Doug

Thanks for the compliment, I've been working to get the crank and block done since October, mostly the block, which I should of stepped in 2 months ago to move things along so things would of been finished by now.  But actually it's been a good learning experience on the cross bolts, which I actually should know since I am the engine builder.
 
Hi Keith

I had them made here:

EDM Shop
1321 E Saint Gertrude Place # B
Santa Ana, CA  92705  Phone: (714) 424-0050

I took them one as a sample for general dimensions with the only critical dimension being the width. I had 2 made @ .378", 3 @.377" & 1 @ .3765". They all started by hand, but as they got farther in, it became harder to move them with more spacer surface contacting the block & caps, requiring to lightly tap them into location.  But after I get the bearings measured, I am going to take and open up the bolt holes slightly, the cross bolts fit the spacers fine, but a little extra clearance will make it easier to line up the spacer holes with the main caps for future assemblies.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I have a question, are any mods needed for the Cleveland bearings for oiling, I've not seen anything mentioned when they are used ?  The reason I am asking, the Cleveland bearings have a slot in the bearings that goes over the oil hole in the FE block where the FE bearings have a hole, I'll get a picture of the Cleveland bearings installed, FE pictured:

 

I found these pictures on line, 351 Cleveland block, it looks like the oil supply feeds the mains then the slot feeds the oil hole to the cam, so looks like I found the answer too my question.

 

[1967 XR7 GT]

I just picked up my 427 Crank with the extra center counterweights.

[cjshaker]

That looks pretty nice, and a cool specialty piece too. Has it been balanced already?

I'm gonna have to head to Lowes. I had no idea they carried 427 parts

[1967 XR7 GT]

Lowes never stops improving...LOL.

The balancing is going to be interesting, the crank weighs about 78 pds, so kinda heavy, and assuming was ran with heavier Lemans rods. So how light can I go with rods & piston before I run into balancing problems.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I stopped by the balancing shop today and talked to the guy. I had found earlier the C4AE 6303 G cranks out of the High Riser had a 2,303.5 gr. bobweight,  my crank is the C4AE 6303 G but has 2 extra counterweights off the center main, the balancing guy says the extra 2 weights won't effect the bobweights very much if any since their on the center main.

My dilemma is, if I go too light on the rods and pistons, he'll have to swiss cheese the crank weights to balance the assembly and if I go too heavy he'll have to add Mallory Metal. I took him one of the SK rods and a stock 390 C7AE-B rod, the 390 rod is too light, and the SK is too heavy.

So referencing the rotating weight of 650 gr of the SK rod and a guesstimate weight of 800 gr for a TRW piston & pin those would add 300 gr to the bobweight requiring Mallory metal.  Options are finding a piston & pin weighing 500 gr to lose the 300 gr or find a rod & piston combo to loose the 300 or so weight.

So the trick is finding what I need off the shelf other wise I will have to go custom ($$$$).

A C4AE-6303-G is a forged steel crank, induction hardened SAE 1046 material.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I have not updated in some time, I've collected some minor engine parts.

I did send my manifold out to have all the stripped out carb stud holes time serted and had the carb base pad decked.



I had gotten the car moved into the garage, got the headers off and had forgotten how much work they are, and gotten the heads off.



Back in July 2014, my storage was broken into and 2 of my motorcycle were stolen. Fast forward Feb 2016, get a call from the police and they inform me my 79 Yamaha Daytona Special was recovered. $455 dollars later I pick my bike up from the impound. So I've been picking up pieces to put this back on the road. Basically to many projects at one time.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Now, with the Biggest Ticket Item out of the way, I can start working on the little stuff.

I've had these items show up at my door. Heads are the Street Pro Ports, with stock location exh. Shock Towers made it necessary to go with stock location exh, due to how tight the 2 1/8" adjustable headers were, I couldn't take the chance with having the headers re-flanged, then dealing with fitment issues.

Then I had my "J" Sidewinder matched ported

[Ford428CJ]

Very nice Richard! By the way which rod let go?

[1967 XR7 GT]

The rod didn't actually let go, probably just spun the bearing, it was knocking pretty good.

And it was the No. 1 rod.

[Ford428CJ]

If it was the #1 rod.... It wasn't (more then  likely ) an oiling issue.

[jimeast]

Probably just a piece of lint or dust, but in the first photo showing the main bearing installed, it looks like there is a crack across the oil hole in the block?

** EDIT ** I noticed it might be a photo of another block your using for reference?

[KMcCullah]

Heads are the Street Pro Ports, with stock location exh.

Excellent choice on heads. I love mine.

Damn I'm happy to see this thread going again. Get that cat rolling, Richard.

[1967 XR7 GT]

It took a while to save up for these, and I've also picked up a few small items here and there. Maybe in 3 or 4 months I'll have a 390 together.

Heads are the Street Pro Ports, with stock location exh.

Excellent choice on heads. I love mine.

Damn I'm happy to see this thread going again. Get that cat rolling, Richard.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Here's an update.
I haven't work on the car much, but I have been collecting a few items. The car came with power steering, that I am not going to use, I've been collecting manual steering components, idler arm, pitman arm, drag link and so on, to redo the front end, but I'm keeping the power steering box, and converting it to electric power steering. Here's a link to some ideas: http://forums.vintage-mustang.com/mod-custom-forum/670865-anyone-want-100-electric-power-steering-here-you-go.html

 Oh, and I went old school and picked up a new carburetor:
I wanted vacuum secondary's so I went with this NOS Holley 1050 CFM 3 Barrel.

[plovett]

That crank with the center weights is cool as hell.

This is ancient history now, but regarding the 391 crank I was talking about selling to you;  I think I said I was going to wait until I got my other 391 crank back from being machined before I sold the first one.  I thought it was going to be 2-3 months.  Well, it was something closer to 2-1/2 years.  By then you seemed to be way past that point.  Sorry about that. 

paulie

[cammerfe]

You torque the main caps first without spacers or cross bolts in place. Then insert the spacers, they should be almost hard to get in there (have no clearance), but not have to "beat" them in. They have three sizes with a range from .3725 to .3775 so maybe you will have to replace a couple, or maybe you can try again, and possibly move spacers around to get a good fit. I believe Doug at Precision oil pumps may have made up some for people needing to dial that in.

Here is a Ford blueprint on the cross bolted caps, notice it says to torque the main caps first, then place the spacers, it also shows the correct sequence which is a little different than you would think. Also, torque the cross bolts in two steps (at least 3 steps on the main caps). Check it out...

Some years ago, I had an FE engine built by the Roush Prototype Shop. When it came time to fit the spacers for the crossbolts, I had eight spacers available. They found it necessary to make several more in order to have the proper fit. Finally, the spacers went into place with a firm thumb push. They didn't have to be pecked-at' to be placed, and they didn't drop through.

KS

[1967 XR7 GT]

Update, I had previously sent out my Sidewinder to be match ported, when I got it back, I was very disappointed on how it turned out, so I just shelved it.  Eight months later, it's time to start working on the motor again, I pull the manifold down and sent it out to get welded, and then get in touch with Joe D. Craine, to make a long story short the manifold showed today, it will make a substantial improvement on my heads now.

It was too bad Jay wasn't able to find at least a matched ported Sidewinder, let alone a worked one like mine for his Manifold Comparo, I think the results would of been far better than what they were. That was one of the reasons I decided to run a Sidewinder, the unknown potential of a ported version.

[1967 XR7 GT]

I mocked these up today, looks to be plenty of room, Harland Sharp steel end stands, Aluminum spacers, Cast Iron inner factory stands, Crane Cams 1.76 Ductile Iron Adjustable Rocker Arms with upgraded 7/16" 12 point ARP nuts, replacing the heavier original 5/8' 6 point nuts. Now, I will have to sit down, and shim all the rockers centered on the valves.

[CaptCobrajet]

Set-up looks nice.  Those rockers are usually real short on ratio.  They were good to slow a Stock Eliminator car down about two tenths with no other changes.  If you check lift at the valve versus your cam card, it may show you disappointing figures.  The plus side is that there are others that will slip right on and increase valve speed and gross lift.  Check into 534 truck rockers from Rocker Arms Unlimited.  He's up the road from you in Redding.  Gary Patrick.....nice guy but no relation to me other than a good business one......

[1967 XR7 GT]

Had it been determined how much of a loss, and is it production consistent ?  Is it down to say the hydraulic rockers 1.73 ratio, or is it more ?
I had gotten a good price on these, and if the loss isn't to bad, I'll probably just live with it. It will be a fwy cruiser mostly. And it will be a while before I am able to check them out.

Set-up looks nice.  Those rockers are usually real short on ratio.  They were good to slow a Stock Eliminator car down about two tenths with no other changes.  If you check lift at the valve versus your cam card, it may show you disappointing figures.  The plus side is that there are others that will slip right on and increase valve speed and gross lift.  Check into 534 truck rockers from Rocker Arms Unlimited.  He's up the road from you in Redding.  Gary Patrick.....nice guy but no relation to me other than a good business one......

[CaptCobrajet]

It's been years since I checked some of those, but IIRC they were between 1.6 and 1.65.  The loss of valve speed is more of a detriment than the lift lost.

[scott foxwell]

One nice thing about a shoe rocker...you can play with raising or lowering the stand height and probably get that lift back.

[1967 XR7 GT]

Build up-date:

I started this post on the rods I picked up, I'll post the top points here.
BBC Rods with .927" Piston Pins 

Here are the spec's on the rods:
6.500 CTOC
2.325 BE BORE
.900 BE WIDTH
.927 PE BORE
.900 PE WIDTH
CENTER BEARINGS
GRAM WEIGHTS: 577 / 257

I decided to go with a SCAT 4.125" stroker with BBC jrl's to use the Crower rods making it 468 ci's.

I was talking to Blair and it was suggested I have two rods opened up to take .990" pins and he could probably find a couple of pistons with .990" pins I could borrow for mock-up purposes, then afterwards have my rods bushed back to .927" pins.
I did some math, and after I bushed the rods to .990" then back to .927" and shipping both ways for the borrowed pistons, it started to add up, so I found on Ebay believe it or not, a set of SB2 4.250" bore JE pistons that use 2.250-.927" pins, I look thru my pin stash looking for a set of 2.950" pins I know I have, and find a partial set of 2.250/.927" pins, so I grabbed the pistons for $65 bucks.

The pistons arrived over a week ago, and I went and picked up my SCAT crank today, I ended up getting one of their 4340 forged cranks, it says "PRO STOCK" STYLE, so does that make me a Pro Stocker Now...   So anyways, 2.200" dia, 2.008" wide and a .125" jrl radius, I ordered the crank last week, but they had to clearance the counterweights for a 6.5" rods.

[thatdarncat]

Hi paulie

 From what I was able to find out, this crank (C4AE 6303 G) came in the 64 427 HR and in the TBolts and is listed in the 427 7000 RPM Kits and was used as a Nascar Crank.

But I haven't found out anything about the 2 extra counter weights, I did talk to Adney after he received the crank and had a quick look and he said the counterweights could of been welded on after it was forged ? It's currently in the Crank Queue, so when it gets to my turn to get worked on maybe then he can tell if the counterweights were added or if it was forged that way ?

And as for the 391 crank maybe we can work out a deal, and I'll throw it in my 390, I am going to be putting a crank in it anyways, and I know I could have the one in it turned, but something tells me to replace it and the rods too..  I got screwed over on a set of FE rods I bought, they ended up having well over .040" side clearance, which is way too much, instead of eating their purchase price, since the outstanding seller isn't going to refund my money, I am going to fix them, I'll have one of the sides welded up on rods 1 thru 4 to take up the excess clearance between the pairs, and install them in my 390 after I work them over a bit.

Where are you at on your crank ?

Email me and we can discuss the FT crank





Hi Jay

It already has a windage tray, but I will keep the stock pan and run 6 quarts and restrict oil to the heads like you suggested on the 390, but I will get a 7 or 8 quart pan but it will go on the Side Oiler.

I was going through some assorted FE crankshafts that belonged to a local friend of ours. One of them was a forged FE crank with a C4AE-6303-G I.D. number on the counterweight. I did some internet searching on that number, since it’s not a real common one, and one of the threads I came across was this one, along with Richard’s other post on the old FE Forum. I just thought I’d add a couple pictures of this crank to go along with the one Richard has, for anyone searching in the future, like I was. This crank does not have the additional center counterweights added, so I guess we can say both possibilities exist. The characteristics of this crank match the other things I’ve read, it’s not cross drilled and so it doesn’t have hollow and plugged journals. It looks like the picture of the  “7000 rpm kit” memo is no longer on the old FE Forum thread, does anyone have a copy of that they can post?

[1967 XR7 GT]

It's unfortunate this project is taking so long, too many changes amongst other things, got me thinking I probably should go back to my original build idea, instead of going bigger and more HP on a 57 year old factory block, so it's what I am going to do.

I, still want to do the larger HP build but will have to wait for an after market block.