Engine rebuild

[Reborn67]

 Ok, Just found a post by Meercat (2014) with the same problem, the general view is a 157T will fit, if so has anybody done this before and had starter issues?

[Dwayne]

Make sure you also get correct balance weight to match your crank. It will be either zero, 28oz or 50oz.

The machinist will need the harmonic balancer, rotating assembly and flex plate for balancing.

[GEOFF289]

Ok, Just found a post by Meercat (2014) with the same problem, the general view is a 157T will fit, if so has anybody done this before and had starter issues?

I am open to correction but I thought the 160 tooth plates were mostly on very early 5 bolt 289's and 260's but occasionally popped up on various Fords until '67. I think they are interchangeable with a 157 tooth one.

[Reborn67]

It had me baffled a bit too until l found that there is quite a few around,mine is an orinigal FoMoCo stamped 6bolt 289 flexplate,  The car being a jan 67 build maybe ford were just using up old stock? And Yes got the whole 28oz  ext bal thing sorted, Just has you second guessing yourself when you cant find one, thanks for feedback..,

[Blue Oval]

I just caught this thread even though it's getting on. Just like myself :-)

Great decision to go the stroker route.
Much easier, friendly horsepower. To get a 289 to the same means bigger revs= bigger cam= equals worse idle= worse manifold vacuum= fouling spark plugs etc.

You've had some good advice here. Especially from ShaunP and Barnett468.

The cam is a good choice. Not over the top. I'd go 3.5 gears though. Don't even think about the 2.79 you have.
Personally I'd go a little more on the converter though. Closer to 3000 rpm and a decent brand like TCE.
If you have a quality converter you won't see flaring at cruise.
I had a 4500 rpm TCE and you wouldn't pick it from a standard converter until you nailed it.
With this 347 I had a 800 dp Pro systems carb on a victor Junior single plane manifold and 4.11 gears.

I have since changed the cam to a Howards Hyd roller
Lift: .597 / .597, Duration @ .050: 227 / 233, Centerline: 108,Lobe sep 112, Small Base Circle, Good idle, Good all around performance, Good vacuum, 9.5:1+ compression, 2500+ stall converter & gears.

Changed manifold to an Air Gap dual plane, Carb to a Holley 750 Vacuum sec HP, Diff gears to 3.5 (from 4.11), and converter to 3500 rpm.

The engine now has manifold vacuum, clean plugs, cruises on the highway nicely and would still pull a high 11 sec 1/4 mile.

In finishing I'd like to say once this is done you'll need to hang on to ya hat !!
You're in for a surprise.

[Reborn67]

 As Always, Great to have another opinion, always interested in other peoples stories, thanks,
 Happy to say that have finally finished stripping the engine down  and dropped it off at the machinist, (the block that is) and have had the new parts being delivered daily, so the rebuild process has begun, exciting times,   

[shaunp]

Question time again,  Sourcing Flexplates.., Having trouble finding a supplier of a 160T Ext bal 10.5" bolt Diam Flexplate, l feel like l am chasing a unicorn, l have heard of others chasing them so l hope someone can throw me a line, if l change to a 157T, l assume that would conflict with the starter, or can gears be changed in those, considering l will have it looked at before it goes back in the car?
 As usual thanks for thoughts..,

157 28oz is what you need, all starters work as long as the plate is the correct diameter to the bell-housing. My car has an Australian Clevo bell-housing on the Toploader as they have a hydraulic clutch and being RHD I need that. So I run a 164 tooth fly wheel, but the starter is the same.

[Reborn67]

157 28oz is what you need, all starters work as long as the plate is the correct diameter to the bell-housing. My car has an Australian Clevo bell-housing on the Toploader as they have a hydraulic clutch and being RHD I need that. So I run a 164 tooth fly wheel, but the starter is the same.

 Good to hear, Thanks again...,

[Reborn67]

 Back again, Block is still at the machinist, no rush, But do have a question, curious about high volume oil pans,
 Considering the budget for this build is growing on a daily basis, (my theory is do it once and do it right) is a hivol pan over kill or just good sense when doing a full build, Have been driving Landcruisers for over 20 years and have always been impressed with their 10lt
plus oil pans, different i know but practically good, anyway, as usual any feedback would be great...,
 post script, l do not intend to race or drag this car but a 350+ hp engine is not for Sunday church runs...,

[shaunp]

Back again, Block is still at the machinist, no rush, But do have a question, curious about high volume oil pans,
 Considering the budget for this build is growing on a daily basis, (my theory is do it once and do it right) is a hivol pan over kill or just good sense when doing a full build, Have been driving Landcruisers for over 20 years and have always been impressed with their 10lt
plus oil pans, different i know but practically good, anyway, as usual any feedback would be great...,
 post script, l do not intend to race or drag this car but a 350+ hp engine is not for Sunday church runs...,

I use the canton ones, I have fully baffled (hinge baffles) Road race on for the 363 dart, but for a cruiser that you will Rev to 6k its not such a big deal. I think the base model Canton one is about 300 & has a crank scraper which is a good thing and a bit of baffling. Your engine with AFR's will be around 400hp

[Reborn67]

 Now just briefly touching on the AFR head subject, l have heard that the spark plug angle on these heads can cause plug/lead clearance concerns with the headers, is this true or does it come down to AFR compatible headers, any thoughts??

[Coupe66]

I have 185 AFR heads and yes the spark plug boots come very close to the extractors and some plugs are a bit of a pain to change , but the AFR heads are that good I just put up with it.
I played around with the plug boots to get the right angle to give enough clearance and it is fine.
I have Castle headers with 1 5/8” primaries to suit a RHD 66.

[GEOFF289]

Now just briefly touching on the AFR head subject, l have heard that the spark plug angle on these heads can cause plug/lead clearance concerns with the headers, is this true or does it come down to AFR compatible headers, any thoughts??

Can't possibly be any worse than GT40P heads. Changing plugs in these is a real pain but can be done. A set of iridium ones in mine should mean I never have to do it again.

[shaunp]

Now just briefly touching on the AFR head subject, l have heard that the spark plug angle on these heads can cause plug/lead clearance concerns with the headers, is this true or does it come down to AFR compatible headers, any thoughts??

You'll be fine. These heads have a very efficient chamber design with a high swirl action they work very well and flow nice if you haven't already  got the rockers you could go for 1.7 rather than 1.6 to wake it up a little more. AFR heads love cam lift up to about 600 thou.

[Reborn67]

 Thanks for feed back, with regard to lifter ratio, the cam card reads .565 lift with a 1.6 rocker, a 1.7 would give it bang on .600 lift,
 The lift on the valves is stated as .600 max, thats too close is it not, l do fully intend to check the cam once assembled to check that it is the one it says it is, but just how much compressive clearance should springs have, l dont know if l want to get the new heads rebuilt to suit higher lift valves?

[shaunp]

Thanks for feed back, with regard to lifter ratio, the cam card reads .565 lift with a 1.6 rocker, a 1.7 would give it bang on .600 lift,
 The lift on the valves is stated as .600 max, thats too close is it not, l do fully intend to check the cam once assembled to check that it is the one it says it is, but just how much compressive clearance should springs have, l dont know if l want to get the new heads rebuilt to suit higher lift valves?

You mean max lift on the springs?

[shaunp]

Yeah you are right the 185's have a different spring which only allows 600, so go with 1.6 or change the springs. I was thinking of the 195s which will take 650 thou  more presure

[Reborn67]

 Yeah, sorry l meant on springs, glad somebody knowns what l am on about, any way thanks for feed back, rockers go from 1.6-1.7, nothing in between?

[shaunp]

yep thats it the PAC springs on the 195 comp heads are 155 on the seat and will rev just over 7200, take 650 lift

[barnett468]

...rockers go from 1.6-1.7, nothing in between?

1.65 

https://www.summitracing.com/search/part-type/rocker-arms/make/ford/engine-size/4-7l-289/engine-family/ford-small-block-windsor?N=4294890973

What cam do you have?

What is the static compression?

Did you have the block zero decked?
.

[shaunp]

1.65 

https://www.summitracing.com/search/part-type/rocker-arms/make/ford/engine-size/4-7l-289/engine-family/ford-small-block-windsor?N=4294890973

What cam do you have?

What is the static compression?

Did you have the block zero decked?
.

272 Voodoo HR they are about 560 lift from memory.

[Reborn67]

 Hey, The cam is as Shuanp says, a 272 it is carded as having .565 lift, so a 1.65 rocker would change it to .583,  would that be ok with the AFR 1388 heads, having a limit of .600? .017 doesn't seem like much,
 The block is at the machinist as we speak and it will be zero decked,

[barnett468]

Hey, The cam is as Shuanp says, a 272 it is carded as having .565 lift, so a 1.65 rocker would change it to .583,  would that be ok with the AFR 1388 heads, having a limit of .600? .017 doesn't seem like much,
 

It's enough.

I would use the cometic head gaskets and if you have 3.50 gears or numerically higher and run premium gas, I would run a least 10.0 compression and more like 10.5.

[Reborn67]

Block back from machinist and ready for rebuild!!

[Reborn67]

Before, clogged up was an understatement