352 with cross bolt bosses

[pclowes]

I have a C4AE-A block that was cast with cross bolt bosses which seems unusual to me.  Is there anything else that might be special about this block?
 
This block had a 4" bore. I bored it .050 over a few years ago.
 
I see that there were also C4AE-A 389/391 truck blocks with a 4.050 bore that were cast this way but this block started out with the smaller bore.

Just wondering if I should set it aside for something more than a mild street build.

[Heo]

My PI block is like that, saw another C4AE-A block like
that at the shop who is doing my heads. Someone here
had pics of a block like that. I think it was  cjshaker

[fekbmax]

I have had 2 of these blocks. Still have one. Both had/have thin and inconsistent cylinder walls, even thinner than a garden variety 360/390 . Maybe my blocks where irrigation or industrial and not suited for automotive use.
Also, I'm not sure if it's common or not but the main oil feed from the filter pad up to the center oil passage has a hole in the upper portion of the galley at the lifter oil passage. I have never seen this on any other block. So if you were to block the oil gallies for solid lifters you would need to also put a plug back deep in the lifter valley passage between the main galley and first lifter on the passenger side.





The red line on the drawing of the oiling system below illustrates what I'm trying to get across. It seems that it was to possibly help oil the lifters on the passenger side of the engine ?. I don't know and the c4 block I have is the o my place I have ever seen this.

[fekbmax]

Also both the c3 and c4  blocks i have/had you will notice that only the #3 and #4 main's have the 3 rib webbing where as the D3 and D4 and some 105 blocks have the webbing on mains #2, #3, and #4.

[cammerfe]

My C4 block was part of a '64 PI engine. I got it from a guy I worked with at T&C Livonia and he got it from another guy we worked with who bought the car new in '64. It had the knobs for the crossbolts, and a full set of webbed mains. We cross-bolted it, using a set of main caps I got at a swap meet at Milan. The cylinder walls were good enough that I could have gone out to 4.13 but I decided to only go to 4.08. I've since taken it out to 4.09.

KS

[chris401]

Question I asked and answer from another forum:



Regarding The Cross Bolt Casting C5AE-A Block Build BelowJuly 26 2016 at 12:24 PM   Chris McAlpine  (Login chris401)
Members
I remember Rod C. posted that 352 cast on front was a Detroit foundry mark. That is true of the 5 blocks I have here. Two are C5AE-A, August 64; 12 DIF; W under clock and March 65; 10 DIF; E1 under the clock. Neither have norbs. I am curious what date your 440 is Brent or if it was just one line that cast these blocks.


Not Brent but.....   July 26 2016, 3:02 PM

....I've had a few of the C5 blocks with the provisions to support 427 caps, all were dated June and July of 1964. And they were 390 blocks FYI.


DIF had eleven Mold Lines where the molten iron was poured.......   July 26 2016, 6:50 PM

........into the molds. Blocks were cast on #1 and #2 Mold Lines.

[cjshaker]

My PI block is like that, saw another C4AE-A block like
that at the shop who is doing my heads. Someone here
had pics of a block like that. I think it was  cjshaker

Yes, my C4 block which came out of a '64 Mercury has the crossbolt bosses, and the 3 fingered webbing. I used it for over 20 years in my '68 F250 Highboy. Now I've got a 445 stroker kit for it and it will be used in my '70 F350, hopefully for another 20+ years. Then I'll figure out what to do with it after that

I wouldn't be afraid to use it in any sort of street build.

[pclowes]

Also both the c3 and c4  blocks i have/had you will notice that only the #3 and #4 main's have the 3 rib webbing where as the D3 and D4 and some 105 blocks have the webbing on mains #2, #3, and #4.

The block that I have has the three fingered webbing on all of the mains except the drivers side of #2.  The casting is also noticeably thinner on that side of the main between the two cast struts that are there.  The question I have is, why was this done?  It's as if the casting was purposely made weaker with the simple elimination of this one feature.  And yet someone chose to use this casting, with all of these good features, over a casting without but in the end said this is too good so let's screw it up.  Crazy.  Definitely, not one of Fords better ideas.